"...And then there’s natural language understanding and reasoning, and I would say we have not really made progress at all. GPT-3, which we may wanna talk about, gives the illusion of having natural language of understanding, but I don’t really think that it does. And we are nowhere near, for example, an all-purpose general assistant. ..."
That's a false dichotomy. Select the name Gary Marcus, right-click, and search (on my browser it defaults to Duck Duck Go, but that returns the right result).
The Mindscape Podcast is hosted by Sean Carroll. You have a very sharp quantum physicist interviewing an expert in the field of AI research.
The podcast is worth the time, and the quote is representative of an expert's take on the matter. He elaborates, but I don't need to write an essay just to argue on the internet.
For anyone who's reading the above comment, the additional context that slowmovintarget hasn't provided is that Gary Marcus supports a school of thought in AI that opposes the currently popular school of thought that favors deep neural networks. A frequently contested point is what each school thinks is the path to AGI. Marcus is a well-known figure in AI.
This argumentation is based on the "feeling" that something doesn't understand things the way they do and that this is sufficient to say that it is inferior. It's a very old argument against AGI, and it's as boring as it ever was: It relies on human exceptionalism and on the concept of the soul (i.e. something humans have and other things can never have, which cannot be quantified or understood). It is compelling only to those who are religious or who still hold religious tendencies.
Either the quote is poorly chosen or reading this article is not worth the time.